Category: community and culture

  • Forging Foreign Relations

    Forging Foreign Relations

    The new movie Fjord, which won the 2026 Cannes Palme d’Or and has been praised by credible critics, asks engaging questions but is ultimately unsatisfying.

    This legal thriller written, directed, and co-produced by Cristian Mungiu tells the story of a Romanian engineer named Mihai Gheorghiu, his Norwegian wife, and nursing home caregiver, Lisbet, and their five children. Mihai and Lisbet, who are devote Christians, have relocated from Romania after Mihai’s parents died to Norway to be closer to Lisbet’s family.

    Mihai and Lisbet are suspected of child abuse by one of their kids’ teachers who also works for Child Welfare Services. Mihai denies the abuse allegations, but Lisbet and he admit to physical punishment, which triggers the removal of their children until the investigation can be completed.

    The attorney recommended by local church leaders soon refuses to represent them because she thinks Mihai is too difficult. Lisbet then asks their neighbor Mia, who is a non-practicing lawyer, married to the local school headmaster Mats, and caring for Mats’ ailing father, to represent them.

    Mihai suspects religious persecution, and Mia manages to resolve the Child Services investigation, and return the children to the Gheorghius. Mia however declines to represent them in the upcoming criminal trial, and encourages them to leave the country, which they do before it begins.

    This movie is artistically accomplished as its awards suggest. Perhaps the strongest element is the ensemble, which includes consistently strong performances that expands the focus and highlights the themes.

    The obvious context is parenting and religion, which are two sacred spaces where intervention at best is complicated. Norwegian society maintains that state obligations to children supersede parental prerogatives, and that the community is greater than the individual, which challenge the Romanian culture in which Mihai was raised and the religious beliefs Lisbet and he share.

    As a result, the movie questions the limits of tolerance in an increasingly globalized world. The Norwegian answer is that the state should err on the side of the child, and should protect them even if doing so fractures families, which even confounds Lisbet who presumably has been exposed to such principles and values.

    This tension is powerfully dramatized throughout the movie. For example, the anger-management class scene with Mihai and others was excruciating — sound strategies, unsettling conformity — while the parenting classes, which Lisbet completes off-screen, cannot mask the forced attendance of a mother who has been raising five children of various ages.

    Mihai and Lisbet resist the proposed civil settlement — the process seemed strangely less adversarial given the stakes — and got more of what they wanted. This outcome however cannot dispel the ominous shadow from the looming criminal case.

    The plot, which seemed sufficient but little more, sometimes sagged beneath the weight of these themes. Moreover, its conclusion confusingly muted the overall experience.

    What are we to do when Mia’s stepdaughter Noor, who befriended the older Gheorghiu children wades into the sea in pursuit of the ferry on which her friends and their family have escaped to Denmark? And what is the significance of Noora’s walking on water?

    Such fits and starts, which recurred throughout the movie, were frustrating, and prevented me from engaging with it as a legal thriller or even a family drama. More synthesis throughout this story that is loosely based upon actual events would have made this movie seem less unfinished, and unsatisfying.

  • The Day After Today

    The Day After Today

    I, and apparently others, are relieved that the mid-term elections end today. I’m exhausted by the speculating prognosticators, especially when they’ve been so wrong in the recent past.

    I’m also concerned that liberals are too focused on this current administration. It has been stunningly destructive, and such actions obviously deserve accountability, which can also act as an affirmation of our political system.

    However, I’m more concerned about its enablers, particularly those who will persist regardless of the election outcomes. The most obvious examples are elected Republicans, who have been sabotaging the American system even before they denied the Democrats in 2016 a Supreme Court appointment.

    official publisher cover image

    I’m even more concerned by liberals who seem relatively unaware of their part in this problem. Some believe that Democrats haven’t learned their lesson from the 2016 election, but I wonder if the problem is even bigger, and includes those of us who refuse to recognize that we might have never been woke, which contributed to the 2016 election conditions and still seem largely unrecognized today.

    This larger danger must also be addressed for the greater good of American democracy. This system has confronted existential challenges in the past and managed to survive these, but past performance as some say needn’t predict future results.

    Liberals must confront their own contributions to the conditions that allowed for the emergence of this administration and its enablers if they’re going to change the present, and continue the pursuit of this more perfect union.

  • Another One

    Another One

    I expected more fundraising chatter when I turned on WBEZ this morning and was surprised by the regularly scheduled programming.

    I heard four promos and ads before any news yesterday morning. I heard several more spots and a traffic report along with some headlines before the latest financial appeals resumed.

    WBEZ reportedly wants to raise one million dollars by the end of the month. Its previous fundraiser, which ended about three weeks ago, seems to have left it substantially short of this goal, so it initiated a follow-up this week, and is reportedly still some $300,000 short of its finish line.

    The previous one, which lasted for over a week, offered monthly donors a generic stream that allowed them in exchange for any local coverage to avoid these appeals, which is better I guess than enduring this incessant and irrelevant chatter. This second fundraiser for whatever reason did not include such a stream for those who already donate every month.

    As a result I heard hosts offer some strange appeals. One explained that the donations from last year didn’t fill the financial holes in the budget for this year. Another suggested that a monthly donation was like the difference between a lump-sum payment and a monthly deposited check.

    WBEZ didn’t learn any lessons in other words and cannot balance a budget. It continues to blame its financial challenges on the federal funding cuts from more than a year ago as if these cuts hadn’t been championed by conservatives for years, and if responsible executives hadn’t had enough time to formulate backup plans.

    WBEZ didn’t learn any lessons in other words and cannot balance a budget. It continues to blame its financial challenges on the federal funding cuts from more than a year ago as if these cuts hadn’t been championed by conservatives for years, and if responsible executives hadn’t had enough time to formulate backup plans.

    None of these concerns and others has been assuaged by the latest Chicago Public Media initiative, which is a public social network called < chicago.com >. This network according to CPM will be a collaboratively-constructed public space for community conversations and local information as well as other content.

    Unclear at least at the moment is whether this network will identify curated content and if the rest will be assessed for accuracy, which are two crucial public media functions. How will users know whether the information in this network is as reliable as what they hear on the radio? How will they know whether these guides are as reliable as the ones that appear in the newspaper?

    This issue has already arisen in response to an AI-generated SUN-TIMES summer reading guide last year. It will only become more urgent in this new initiative unless users expect something other than curated and credible content in this space, which in my opinion would challenge a fundamental public media function.

    No one whom I read seems to know the future of journalism in this increasingly digitized world. Regardless, the stakes given the way AI has been seeping throughout societies might never have been higher.

    Countries still need public media to democratically survive. Communities still need sustainable public media to thrive.

    Here’s hoping that Chicago Public Media knows what it is doing, and is responsibly using what we donate.